Sometime within the next seven days, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will release a new photo of their little-seen son Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, according to an article in the Sunday Times (quoted in the Sun, with no paywall).
It tickles the imagination to think about what this image might look like, particularly considering the Sussexes' passion for Photoshop.
The classic Archie photos - the ones used again and again in British tabloids, including the link above - were taken in South Africa in September 2019, a good 7 1/2 months ago.
The little red-haired fellow in those images looked healthy and well-fed, although entirely uninterested in the two people who were supposedly his parents.
None of the nuzzling or the seeking of comfort or approval that infants usually display with their primary caregivers, or people they know and like. (Prince Charles' recent image with his grandson Prince Louis is a good example)
Will the birthday images show the same little human? (At the time, there were suggestions that the South Africa Archie was a baby model, with exclusive rights purchased for a full year by the Sussexes. For what it's worth, South Africa has a thriving modeling community used frequently by European catalog producers who want a variety of ethnic types in their campaigns.)
It wasn't entirely clear if the same infant was pictured in the uber-Photoshopped Sussex family Christmas card or in Harry's recent Canada shot with Archie. (The Canada shot looked a lot like a little girl.)
Even as far back as the Christening photos, there were questions about multiple infants. One of our regular commenters at the time - KayeC - was married to a pediatrician.
She showed him two of the Sussexes' Christening photos and he said, "Those are two different babies."
Really? she asked.
He gave her a look, having seen hundreds if not thousands of babies in his career. "Yes," he said.
Or will he be out playing in the California sunshine? If the Sussexes are staying in Malibu, as they would like people to believe, will we see Archie on the beach? (The beaches are public, so even if they're not living there, they could just drive up the coast and do a photo shoot.)
Or will Archie be in the grounds of a lavish estate where the Sussexes want people to think they live?
And will both parents be with him in the shot? There have been rumors, based on the white-wall videos, that Harry may be at least part-time in the UK while Meghan is in California.
The South Africa baby, supposedly only four months old, was already clearly standing - in fact, the bottoms of his socks were dirty. Pulling up to a standing position is generally a 6.5 months to 8.5 month behavior.
If we throw aside the multiple-baby model theory and assume there is only one baby pictured in all of the Sussex images so far, how old is he really? There have been many suggestions he was born in late February or early March 2019, not May.
At any rate, Happy Birthday Archie, whenever it was, and whoever you are.
It tickles the imagination to think about what this image might look like, particularly considering the Sussexes' passion for Photoshop.
The classic Archie photos - the ones used again and again in British tabloids, including the link above - were taken in South Africa in September 2019, a good 7 1/2 months ago.
The little red-haired fellow in those images looked healthy and well-fed, although entirely uninterested in the two people who were supposedly his parents.
None of the nuzzling or the seeking of comfort or approval that infants usually display with their primary caregivers, or people they know and like. (Prince Charles' recent image with his grandson Prince Louis is a good example)
Babies change a lot
Babies change a lot in 7 1/2 months - or in two weeks, as Prince Harry notoriously said around the time of Archie's first public presentation - so it will be interesting to see how much Archie has changed since his last non-Photoshopped appearance in South Africa.Will the birthday images show the same little human? (At the time, there were suggestions that the South Africa Archie was a baby model, with exclusive rights purchased for a full year by the Sussexes. For what it's worth, South Africa has a thriving modeling community used frequently by European catalog producers who want a variety of ethnic types in their campaigns.)
It wasn't entirely clear if the same infant was pictured in the uber-Photoshopped Sussex family Christmas card or in Harry's recent Canada shot with Archie. (The Canada shot looked a lot like a little girl.)
Even as far back as the Christening photos, there were questions about multiple infants. One of our regular commenters at the time - KayeC - was married to a pediatrician.
She showed him two of the Sussexes' Christening photos and he said, "Those are two different babies."
Really? she asked.
He gave her a look, having seen hundreds if not thousands of babies in his career. "Yes," he said.
Both parents?
Another interesting aspect will be the setting of Archie's first birthday photo. Will he be up against the plain white wall that's served as the background for Harry's recent videos?Or will he be out playing in the California sunshine? If the Sussexes are staying in Malibu, as they would like people to believe, will we see Archie on the beach? (The beaches are public, so even if they're not living there, they could just drive up the coast and do a photo shoot.)
Or will Archie be in the grounds of a lavish estate where the Sussexes want people to think they live?
And will both parents be with him in the shot? There have been rumors, based on the white-wall videos, that Harry may be at least part-time in the UK while Meghan is in California.
How old?
Finally, how old will Archie be in his first-birthday photos?The South Africa baby, supposedly only four months old, was already clearly standing - in fact, the bottoms of his socks were dirty. Pulling up to a standing position is generally a 6.5 months to 8.5 month behavior.
If we throw aside the multiple-baby model theory and assume there is only one baby pictured in all of the Sussex images so far, how old is he really? There have been many suggestions he was born in late February or early March 2019, not May.
At any rate, Happy Birthday Archie, whenever it was, and whoever you are.
Comments
As for the new title of the book, 'Finding Freedom', what an insult. An insult to people who had to find real freedom during various war, people incarcerated for fighting for freedom etc. My won grandparents had to leave their country and possessions in order to 'find freedom'and flee a genocide. Yes, life in KP or Frogmore might have been a gilded cage, however, she went in with her eyes wide open. Fame and riches were her aim. She makes me sick.
She has some die hard fans who see her as everything they would want to achieve one day if some unseen evil forces didn't stop them.
So the Tig 2 will probably be able to make her some money. The big problem Megsy is tacky. She can't attract people with big purses and refined tastes. She was not able to overcome tackiness with all the mighty style army available to the royal family. So to break into the classy top league she will have to release control to some very expensive, very professional creative team. I have just two questions:
1. Does she have money to afford such team on a long term basis
2. Is she physically capable of letting go of control. Doesn't look like her very
expensive legal team in London or NY was able to talk sense into her for the court case
sake.
Personally, Im incline to believe that she thought that she could rig the system in her favour instead of wanting to destroy it. She had no idea what the monarchy is and how it work, and it shows.
She probably saw GoT and figure that she could do that. Long gone are the days when royals could do anything they wanted and damn the consequences. Reality was slap in the face. Courtiers have A LOT more power that she anticipate, getting a long with the Queen and PoW only grants a cute nicknames and money for dresses, but nothing substantial (or whatever she considerate substantial at least), and the RBF is a business and you have do your work as you are told like more business do. She probably though she could have her own court and palace and such, alas, reality is a bitch.
She has no subtle bone in her body, and no understanding of soft power or symbolic power either. She could have make a killing with a bit more patience and two work brain cells. But she need things NOW. It would be funny if it wasnt so sad to see an adult and a mother to act like a spoilt five year old having a long tamtrum. And Harry isnt much better either.
Sometimes it is worth checking in on the Skippy Tumblr account (always cute animal pics!) ... I did not pick up before how Meghan described herself in the submitted documents for the court case.
These are some of the claims Meghan makes about herself:
* well-known American actor
* business entrepreneur
* women's rights activist
* played a leading role for several years (in Suits)
* heavily involved in philanthropic and advocacy work with the United Nations and World Vision, of which she was global ambassador
... and there is more about her being Her Royal Highness (she really does love that HRH).
Hubris, grandiosity, fantastical stories? (A fantasist has a pathological lying disorder.)
You have nailed it. Royalty is a big business and she was useless at it.
Had she been clever, she could have made an ally of Kate but instead she was jealous of her. For someone who's supposed to be so smart, she's shown incredible stupidity.
She reminds me of a little creature running around a big, colorful caravan with lots of horses, and camels and richly dressed people and golden decorations. She is making a lot of noise, desperate to get attention of the caravan and spectators around it.
She can create some inconvenience and irritation for the caravan but she can't stop it or make it change track.
Yeah, when she babble to VF and there was no repercussion, I cringe. Still I never expect this mess.
I know. My grandfather was force to join an army to protect an regime he didnt believe in, but was either the army or death, and who would have taken care of his 6 younger siblings if he was dead? Then he had to emigrate to the other side of the world and have a somewhat arrange marriage and then face a second dictatorial regime, this time hoping his children would make it alive. But Meghan's journey, now that a real fight for freedom and facing adversity. Let me play the tiniest violin of the world for you!
"How to leave your infant on a different continent more than once in the first year of their life"
No one will take her seriously. Archie wasn't properly secured in his snuggie!
Why make the announcement about the Tig? It's like another case where she starts a rumour to provoke a reaction. I'm rooting for Gwyneth and MM is foolish if she actually means to challenge her.
I think this is the beginning of the end for her.
Hopefully, the publish company see reason and at least change the tittle of the book. Or maybe can the palace force them to change them as it use the words royal and monarchy in a commercial use. If they are directly connected with the book, it can cost them dearly.
Even if her plan was always to run to Hollywood, she played all the cards wrong. Its so weird to watch them make all the wrong choices. Why? How?
I think we havent even start seeing her (them, actually, as Harry is just as responsable as her) going the rabbit hole yet. Im slightly unsettle by that idea actually and I hope Im wrong. The BRF will survive, it has survive worst than this two idiots, but still.
The Royal Expert said, "I think a cake smash is almost a certain. It's a big American tradition for the first birthday. The baby gets his or her own little cake that they can literally smash into."
I'm American and have never heard of this. Is this a thing? And will Archie's face be covered with cake in the picture they release and therefore obscured and unrecognizable?
https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/royals/meghan-markle-to-ignore-royal-tradition-and-embrace-american-trend-on-archies-1st-birthday/
I’m British and I’ve never heard of a cake smash either, and it would have zero appeal to me for any child at any age. ��
It’s just as bad when I’ve seen photos of some newly wed couples squish the wedding cake into each other’s faces! Unsure of the origin, but it’s gross IMHO. ��
He has failed, and no matter what happens in the next few years, he can never undo or live down that failure or the dishonour it brings.
The latest example of that failure is the ridiculous book, with its insulting title purporting to elevate them both to a status that is laughable. Collaborating on that book, publishing it, and profiting from it, shows that Harry's failure was not a momentary lapse, but is now a deep and ingrained contempt for all he previously held dear.
He should be deeply ashamed of himself, as a royal, a son, grandson, brother, and as a former Army officer.
No excuse, no reason, no explanation will even change the fact he has betrayed his birthright and those he was born to protect. He has now established his legacy for all time, and it is that of the quisling prince.
Which seems to be true of many things that mm is attracted to.
As for the cake smashing, it's just tacky and obnoxious. But M is stuck in the past and still trying to conceal Archie from the world. Without a title, A is just not a big $$$ attraction. Like Zara and Peters kids. M doesn't seem to realize how far down the totem pole they are. Delusions of grandeur are just that, delusions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQicq60aJaw
Wow, now that's an interesting thought. I could see that as a fleeting thought: episode aired June 2, 2013), marriage to Trevor is winding down, she is then involved with Cory when suddenly JH is in her orbit and all kinds of possibilities.
The post of becoming Queen or even setting up a rival court - mind boggling that something like that could be pulled off in today's world. Centuries ago, yes when mistresses were on display but that isn't something which is done now.
CDAN post - it has that same nasty edge as that post about PW stepping on C had. Enty has better sources in LA but I think he has been played more than once in the lifetime of that blog. Also, when one mixes is a little bit of truth to absolute lie, it makes the lie appear true because you know that that little bit of truth is true.
Cake Smash for babies - I only ever heard of it at weddings (which seemed to have that edge to it of forced amusement and inconsideration of the cost of the dress and how one looks for the rest of the party) and I started thinking that the only parents who might enjoy seeing it would be ones who could hand the baby back to the nanny and order them to clean up the kid.
Goop comparison: The problem with being the one following the leader is that you have to have a much better product line to take their lead. The alternative is you have larger number of items cheaper for people to purchase and spend your days always being compared as the schlocky version of X.
just an observation: She doesn't seem to do well when she knows she is being compared (unfavorably) to a longer running classier whomever. I could be wrong (though).
Title of Book: I usually think of going from some oppressive civic or religious cult set up in addition to the WWII imagery (grew up with some pictures of family who fought in the Civil War). Real horrors against humanity.
Stay with me: When I see a lot of high list/Hollywood/flashy lifestyle people do a renewal of their vows, I start marking the days for how long I think it will take before they announce the divorce. It always seemed to be more about convincing themselves they could still get along than the watching world.
Likewise here, what we have been seeing is all kinds of spaghetti thrown at the wall trying to get something to stick. The book is just the next thing in the list trying to move money into their pocket. We've seen the talking heads confidently talking about the deals which will come their way, that people will be lining up to offer work, disney and the disruptive aura, the browbeating comments of how only A list need apply. All along there have been the convenient merching opps but nothing seems to have come long term ... or even whispers. But little is on the wall and only short term/not long.
So I think of the book as just another short term opportunity which will make them a tiny amount of cash (after all, they are not the authors) which will die a quick death of much lack of interest, pointed reviews and the appearance of the next flashy thing waved in front of people).
As for what will be in the book, I think they will try to pitch it as a life at Versailles (fancy clothing) but in reality most of the actual day to day reality is more like a picture from a nice but sturdy mail order catalog and LL Bean when on vacation. TQ and others will be on vacation so there will be a lot of recent not fancy photos around.
Notice too that events seem to be moving away from the core experiences, job skills the longer they don't have something firm.
The other thing is they will have to figure out how they can point that their life was more like Versailles, it was crushing and then tap dance around how she spent all that money on clothing, took private jets but it was all ok for them to do this but not his family (the one she never had).
I think if there had not been the epidemic, this still would have all shaken down more or less like it did. It probably would have just taken longer. There would have been much more things (backdrop) to make their actions less obvious because people would have been writing about that (distractions as highly important instead of covid). But in the end, their outlook of how they viewed themselves participating in the world still would have been very very similar to the ones they made.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8281779/Controversial-new-documentary-series-claim-Princess-Diana-tried-kill-four-times.html
Princes William and Harry will be 'very upset and angry' over controversial new documentary series which is set to claim Princess Diana tried to kill herself four times
* Planned documentary by DSP will delve into Princess of Wales' inner torment
* Will follow battle with mental health issues, unhappy childhood and marriage
* DSP say controversial documentary has not yet been commissioned by Netflix
* Source claims series will 'upset' Harry who plans to work with streaming giant
" Friends of the ex-actress are said to have contacted the authors to set the record straight..."
Anonymous friends setting the record straight yet again? Hmmm. Could make the MoS case even more interesting. Of course, M never suspected her friends would talk.
About the GoT reference: I know, right? She should have pay a lot more attention, Cercei play the "good" wife for a decade or so before taking over. Also, someone should tell her that Cercei was a villan, not a role model.
I dont think M was stupid enough to think that she could actually be Queen, maybe gather a lot more celebrity status and money, but then again I remember she wrote "you are loved" (or something like that) in a banana to be given to a sex worker in front of a camera and thought it was a brilliant idea, and I think that maybe she is. I havent figure that out yet.
Very long time lurker, first time poster here. I’m fact, I must thank you all for the intelligent and entertaining insights to the Markle debacle. For seven months last year I was undertaking chemotherapy and came across the Nutty blog. I spent hours feeling rubbish and being immersed reading your comments...I hadn’t been hugely interested in H&M’s schemes before then, but the commentary on here - and the crazy, destructive, unpredictable and devious behaviour of the pair - have made me an avid follower! So thank you, everyone!
Re Baby Archie, I just had a realisation regarding his name which I think could be of significance (and apologies if an astute nutty has already figured this out!)
When MM announced the Archewell foundation, someone on here spotted that Arche was an anagram if Rache.
If we follow those clues, I believe that when coming up with a name for her son, MM chose Archie because it was an anagram of Rachel (swap L for I). So in full, Archie Harrison translates as Rachel Harry Son.
Urgh. So much for the faux Ancient Greek meaning. It’s just so predictably basic, isn’t it.
Apologies if someone has already figured this out, and thank you for all of your insights nuttys!
Welcome! I just join this month, and its a nice place to hang and chat. I hope you are felling better nowadays :)
And about the name, how the poor kid would know who his parents are if they give him other name? The poor child is doom.
So I don't feel wildly enthusiastic about the idea of having a cake just to play around with. I usually don't want to sound like a dour Guardian reader (left-wing wokerati) but on this occasion I'll make an exception. It's a bit tone-deaf, especially with many kids in low-income families suffering now schools are closed. School dinners are a life line. I went to a rough school and kids used to faint in morning assembly as they'd had no breakfast.
It's official. I'm now Charles Dickens.
GOT - we don't have cable so what ever I learned about GOT was from chat at lunch sources or the paper. Although I did see something in the DM about GOT done as Bayeux Tapestry which looked very interesting. Forwarded it to friends I knew who watched.
We do have some friends who read the books. Book lover that I am, I can still hear my friend's intonation: I don't know. You realize you just read 42 pages about the weather and it did nothing for moving the plot forward.
Agree, the idea of wasting cake seems rather ghastly at this time. ☹️
Its ok, I have some rather controversial opinions about GoT myself. Its a toxic relationship I have with GoT, I both love and hate it, and I keep going for more even when I dont enjoy it. Your friends description seems accurate to me. Ill stop now before I start to rant about something that no one cares.
But yeah, it seems that M learn about the monarchy from a fantasy book and it hit it in the face. That is all I meant.
Another comment on MM's meanness - I think Harry also has a mean streak a mile wide. Remember the story about him as a child, deliberately running his bicycle into a group of people? The Harry who was so popular with the British people was an image carefully crafted by his advisers - kind, warmhearted Harry. Being with MM has allowed him to be himself and show his true character, and it isn't pretty. Only meanness could explain the way he has treated his father, his grandmother and his brother. He has taken a page out of MM's handbook.
@ Barbara: I recall reading a comment in a DM article from someone who went to school with Harry in their teenage years. This guy said he was a nerdy type who wasn’t part of the cool kids group. He said Harry in particular bullied him. You’d think Harry would have learned compassion from his mother and to not use his royal status to enable himself to bully others.
We all have our bad traits as well as good ones. But associating with someone like Meghan can cultivate the bad traits and make them worse, just as if Harry had married someone who was truly kind and compassionate would foster the growth of those good traits in Harry.
I'm not surprised sugars continue to see Meghan as the future queen of this country as their ignorance is without limits, but Meghan herself was given a good education. She read about the monarchy when younger as we all know now. I just can't understand why she thought she would rank so high when she married Harry. Technically speaking. Count the people in front of him. Like a bus queue. It's not hard.
Maybe Diana distorted things in that final year of her life, when she maintained her place in the spotlight despite the divorce. Things were slipping but that process had only just begun when she died, so unless you do your homework or can remember how things were at the time, as many of us can, you could think that Diana transcended the royal family. That she no longer needed them. That she was bigger than them. Big mistake.
The best thing Meghan and Harry could have done was to read Patrick Jephson's book (Diana's private secretary). He describes how chaotic life became for Diana in that year, without the support network she had had from the BRF. Her visits didn't run as smoothly. People were embarrassed meeting her as they weren't supposed to bow or curtsey but felt they had to. She had no official cars from embassies. Her diary was more scrappy. She started drifting in the world of the super-rich who could provide the level of luxury she was used to but not the veneer of respectability or the necessary discipline and structure she needed and had thrived on in her later years as Princess of Wales. She was heading for an increasingly tawdry and aimless life, despite her amazing achievement with landmines. Things were going downhill but in a more subtle way than we are seeing with her younger son.
If even Diana could not pull off a truly successful life outside the royal fold, what hope could a minor TV actress have, who had none of Diana's qualities? It's the same old story with Meghan. She didn't do her homework and her narcissism made her blind to reality.
The other thing I don't understand is why would any successful barrister accept this brief? No one can represent Meghan without damaging their reputation and embarrassing themselves dreadfully among their peers. We're already seeing the coded language for 'she made me do it'. No one gets away from Meghan unscathed. I guess, like the woke broadsheet journalists, they didn't deign to find out what she was really like first.
Title: This is just the first book. We've yet to see:
Meghan: The Royal Years
Meghan: The Duchess of Sussex Years
Meghan: My Time In Canada
Meghan: The California Years
Meghan: How I Married A Prince (And You Can Too!)
Meghan and Harry: A Love Story For The Ages
Meghan: Philanthropy and Me
Meghan: How To become A Successful Actress Like Me
Meghan: Yachting For Fun And Profit
Meghan: It's My Jewelry Collection And Not Yours
Meghan: How To Dress Like Me
Meghan: How To Maintain Lasting Relationships
Meghan: How I Rid The World Of Hunger and Injustice
Meghan: How To Promote Yourself For Fun and Profit
Meghan: How To Become A Fabulous Cook Like Me
Meghan: How To Become Woke Like Me
Meghan: The Makeup and Hair Guide To Landing A Prince
I'll just stop here.
Welcome. I would not be surprised if Archie is a so named. It is a very high school/teen way of naming your kid.
@Ava C
Oh, yeah! I know you have been waiting a L O N G time for groceries, I remember you posting about this weeks ago! I am sure Rache and Harry will have pictures of Archie out delivering food items, I mean, if is his 5 year old cousin can, so can he, right!
Another comment on MM's meanness - I think Harry also has a mean streak a mile wide. Remember the story about him as a child, deliberately running his bicycle into a group of people? The Harry who was so popular with the British people was an image carefully crafted by his advisers - kind, warmhearted Harry. Being with MM has allowed him to be himself and show his true character, and it isn't pretty. Only meanness could explain the way he has treated his father, his grandmother and his brother. He has taken a page out of MM's handbook.
@ Barbara: I recall reading a comment in a DM article from someone who went to school with Harry in their teenage years. This guy said he was a nerdy type who wasn’t part of the cool kids group. He said Harry in particular bullied him. You’d think Harry would have learned compassion from his mother and to not use his royal status to enable himself to bully others.
We all have our bad traits as well as good ones. But associating with someone like Meghan can cultivate the bad traits and make them worse, just as if Harry had married someone who was truly kind and compassionate would foster the growth of those good traits in Harry.
At least this experience is teaching us new skills and I now love fresh fruit and vegetables as I never did before. I've been trying to prefer them for over 50 years and now, finally, I love them more than chocolate or even alcohol! I think next Christmas will be in reverse.
https://the-best-soap-opera-ever.tumblr.com/post/617117615936192512/submission-harry-explained-through-astrology#notes
Even if you do not follow astrology, or do and disagree with the person's interpretation, it is a fun read! (In short, Harry needs to grow up, and he will never do so with Meghan because she emphasises/brings out the worst, not the best, in him!)
That is exactly what the astrological reading for Harry says! He does have some wonderful qualities that can emerge if he is under the influence of the right people to bring those out in him. Meghan is definitely not the right person in any way at all.
I have a decent recipe for chocolate (or vanilla, cinnamom, or coffee, its versatile recipe) microway mug cake that work well with plain flour. I use the same flour for bread and the mug cake. I cannot find raising agents around here either. Im quarantine by myself so I had time to taste it quite a bit. I had a recipe for flats breads that could work too.
The idea of people wasting food its awful, especially given the circumstances.
And yeah, its crazy that nowadays people don't understand how the monarchy works, but I know quite a few that dont have any idea and I actually have to explain it that it doesnt work like in the movies.
I personally believe that they thought that if they announce it like this it would give them the upper hand in the negotiation and the Queen, Charles and William would be force give in to them because it was already out there. In short, plain stupidity and arrogance.
Give these two enough rope and they will hang themselves. We all know it.
They are on the fast track to becoming world pariahs.
Just getting my popcorn ready ;)
i want to know what the big thing was that forced their hand to announce they were leaving before the RF was going to put them out.
IIRC, the Sun was about to leak the story of their wanting a half-in/half-out role, so the Sussexes believed their hand was "forced."
You can also make yeast from fruit or dried fruit, like raisins as well, with a bit of sugar. Also, potatoes apparently too.
Her hair was unkempt, just hanging there. The dress was showing under her coat, and the coat didn't fit her. It was also belted, a no-no for short women with no waist. It's hem became uneven with every movement. The shoes were far too big for her, and they were not suitable for a royal engagement announcement. They were stilettos that you'd wear to a club. Her makeup was slathered on with a trowel.
But it was her demeanor which got to me. She was attempting the shy act, but you could see that she was well-versed in where the camera was. Her smile was too wide, and she arched her back into him like a sexpot, not a duchess-to-be. Her wave to the cameras was too Hollywood, like a movie premier, not a royal announcement.
The sit-down engagement interview showed that she had no sophistication. She hung on him, holding hands like high school kids, not adults about to be married. Those doe-eyes at Harry were so fake and high school-ish. That smile was not sincere, to say the least. It did not reach her eyes.
I was hoping that MM was a diamond-in-the-rough, who would learn how to dress and proper deportment from the other royal women and courtiers, but that obviously was not the case.
I think many of her stans are so young that they have little life experience to spot some of these things. With age, we've come across people like MM and have learned to pick up on the little signals that go right over the heads of the young and inexperienced. All they see is the razzle dazzle.
Harry’s Autobiography, large print Pamphlet
“50 Ways to leave your Brother”
Notice the quote that the book was started long ago - even before the wedding! I guess those blinds about Meghan keeping records/notes were all true!
FWIW, I think we may be talking about two different books: the "fan fiction" one Scobie and Durand have written, maybe initially Scobie's idea once he realized he could have access to MM if he reported on her the "right" way, and the one that MM always intended to write as her "memoirs." I'm pretty sure Blind Gossip had an item on the latter and how it caused all the Royals to stop talking to MM behind the scenes because she was keeping detailed notes on all the things they said.
MM would know that the second book would be the one to make her real money because it would be something she would negotiate on her own with a publishing house.
“ Wallis and Vomit - The Curse of the Peer G’rabbit ” 😉
You mentioned MM's note-taking. I wonder if it wasn't the Harkles who decided to move out of Kensington place to Frog Cottage. Could it be the HMTQ moved them there because she found out that MM was taking notes about what goes on behind the scenes at
KP? Could she have kicked them out?
HMTQ would know by then that MM could not be trusted and could have moved them far away from the other royals for their protection against even "news" released by MM and"friends" and the possibility that MM would write a book. HMTQ is very savvy. I'm sure she spotted MM for what she was fairly quickly, but had to tread carefully due to the racism threats that MM and Harry were spreading. She was also concerned for Harry's mental health, which, as we can see, is quickly deteriorating. So, she kept them close, but not too close to the other royals.
When will enough be enough for the Queen? I no longer accept the excuse that in order to save Harry and keep the door open to him to return home, the RF needs to let the marriage run its course. If the publication of this shameless, self-congratulatory work of fiction doesn’t cause the titles to be revoked and the funds completely cut off, nothing will IMO.
MM tries to cover all of the bases. I wonder if she also took photos of the royals and private areas at while she was at KP.
My mother always said to play down who you are (rather than play it up) and let others discover the truth about your greatness because they will be more impressed.
Georgina, welcome and I hope you are feeling well these days.
There are many recipes for no-yeast breads. Just Google for recipes. Also here's some info from King Arthur's flour about converting flour types for baking. Read the replies, too, for more info on what will work. I hope this helps.
https://www.kingarthurflour.com/blog/2016/07/21/substitute-bread-flour-all-purpose-flour
I'm wondering, too, why HMTQ hasn't cut them off. The only reason I can think of is that they have some sort of iron-clad contract written up and signed, allowing The Harkles one year support.
Blogger BlueBell Woods said...
“I'm a little surprised at some viewpoints on the dropping of the bombs during WWII. I suppose historians today will always have differing opinions on the past and some will bend the facts to fit those opinions.
The bottom line though was the Japanese would. not. stop. and President Truman wrestled with the weight of making the decision to drop those bombs.
I'm not saying it was a good or bad idea - but it is, what it took at the time to get the Japanese to surrender. I find it hard to believe there was any retroactive scrambling to disguise the reasons for dropping the bombs.”
I agree. Historical revisionism is a very slippery slope.
Blogger JocelynsBellinis said...
@RebeccaB,
“I'm wondering, too, why HMTQ hasn't cut them off. The only reason I can think of is that they have some sort of iron-clad contract written up and signed, allowing The Harkles one year support.“
Yes, but it seems pretty clear that H and M are already guilty of breaching that contract. Unless it was so vaguely written that they can justify their actions.
FWIW I am on day 2 of my sourdough starter!
I agree, I reckon they were asked to leave KP because of Megs snooping/leaking.
Apparently the Gloucesters had already vacated their apartment next to W&K.
H & M were told they would not be moving in there.
According to the Times they asked for an apartment in Windsor Castle,
the Queen said no, and gave them Frog Cottage.
sort themselves out & decide if they were going to abide by the rules, or not.
They had no intention of abiding by the rules, the RF knew this.
They took their “time out” to plot Megxit
and then jumped before they were pushed.
The decisions were made for them despite what madam claims.
Now, articles are coming out about how deeply religious MM is. Does anybody really believe that? Apparently, Archbishop Welby did.
It's far past time for HMTQ to take a firm stand. I really don't know what's holding her back. She has been slapped in the face by The Harkles time and again.
I can’t see the Queen being swayed by Welby.
He strikes me as having too much piety and not enough faith, or common sense.
We can see that MM fluttered her eyelashes at Archbishop Welby, and he fell for it. HMTQ is very religious. Could he have intervened on MM's part to tell HMTQ not to dump The Harkles, that it would be unChristian to do so?
Now, articles are coming out about how deeply religious MM is. Does anybody really believe that? Apparently, Archbishop Welby did.
@JocelynsBellinis: She’s deeply religious all right. Her self-worship has turned into her own personal cult. But as relationships with narcissists tend to be, it’s just a cult of two. Meghan and her obedient follower Harry.
If you read much psychology, even non-clinical psychology on the web, you can find material that discusses the strong parallels between religious cults and relationships with a narcissist. It’s fascinating because both use a lot of the same techniques to entrap and maintain a tight grip on their victims.
These two articles are good starters:
Narcissistic Abuse Syndrome is Like Being in a Cult
14 Ways Narcissists Can Be Like Cult Leaders
I agree with your comments about Welby. If she doesn't trust him to be her spiritual advisor, who would she turn to for that? Just asking.
I can't find the article again, but I read that all corners of government and HMTQ's advisors worked on the Mexit deal. It was a list of about 10 governmental agencies, lawyers and other counsel involved, from Downing Street to Parliament.
Did anybody else read that or remember it? I wish I could find it again. It went far beyond just being just a family matter.
MM was initially caught taking photos @ KP or BP in December 2016. She was thrown out by PC & escorted to the airport by security. Soon after, PH broke up with her. Harry couldn’t speak out about it, because he had just released the ‘Leave Meghan Alone’ letter, in response to her complaints about being hounded by the paps, her house being broken into, etc. (none of which were true.) Based on the stupid decision by Harry to release that letter, thus telling the world that she was his girlfriend, all of 2017 was a long con on MM’s part, pretending that they were still together. She crashed events, including the Inskip wedding, (to which she’d initially been invited as PH’s +1, but they assumed she wouldn’t show since they had broken up) and faked PR (with the help of JM), all culminating in the VF interview in the September issue. They were not together throughout those 9-ish months. In fact, Harry was seen out with other women. That all changed @ the opening ceremony for the Invictus Games. I’m sure many of you have seen the photos where she shows up with Markus Anderson, late and looking worse for the wear, and Harry looks shocked to see her. She was definitely not expected, sat in seats that weren’t assigned to them, and was later escorted out by security.
Then we get the smirking photos of her with him, in the ripped jeans and the ‘husband shirt.’ I’m not sure if that outfit was planned, or if he only let her accompany him at the last minute. Whatever happened that weekend, (I assume blackmail), suddenly she’d packed up
her house in Toronto and moved to London (she was getting written off of Suits anyway.) I don’t believe that he knew that she was moving to London as he certainly hadn’t invited her. I think that when she moved there, she was actually living at SOHO House, but continued the ‘negotiations’ so to speak. Her not living with him would also explain her showing up in the horrific ‘engagement outfit’ with not only too-big, but filthy shoes. (She was often photographed in muddy shoes.) Because she was living in the country, not the city. As far as the engagement interview, it was quite clear to me that not only was she a phony, but also, that they barely knew each other. They didn’t even have their story straight as to how and when they met. Their ‘relationship’ was based on a string of booty calls, and possibly mutual drug use, that she somehow parlayed into an engagement.
The wedding was never supposed to happen. She agreed to a pay-off, but ‘changed her mind’ at the last minute. Hence the ill-fitting dress, etc. She certainly was never, ever liked or trusted by the BRF.
In terms of housing, the Gloucester’s never moved out of their KP apt. Yes, there was work done, but it was external work that needed to be done anyway and the Gloucester’s still live there. I think that they were willing to move, if asked, but there was no way that jealous, crazy, MM would be allowed to live in the apartment next to William and Kate and their children. Frogmore was not a choice; does anyone believe that she would really choose to leave London for Windsor? There are also many stories from Windsor locals that they never lived in Frogmore, so who knows where they really were? Or if they were even together.
Re: ‘Archie’s’ birthday pic—I’ve always believed that there was a surrogate but that they didn’t have custody of ‘Archie’. However, at this point, I could just as easily believe that there is no baby anywhere. As far as the ‘cake smash’ idea, I agree; that is not an American tradition. I believe that she somehow leaked this story, thus giving her the opportunity to show a photograph of an unrecognizable baby whose face is covered in cake. Her only other option, really, is to show a photograph of them from the back, walking down the beach in Malibu.
It’s not that HM doesn’t want to get rid of her; she’s just figuring out how to do it without any blow back.
Yes, there is a huge correlation between cult leaders and narcissism. Same with government leaders and heads of business.
You mention the cult of Meghan as the cult leader, and Harry as her first disciple, but it is more than that. She has her sugar following. They are a part of the MM cult, as are the Soho House people and the friends who have remained even after seeing the cruel and outlandish behavior by Megs and Harry. Normal people would have stayed far away from them by now.
There was a girl I knew in elementary school, whom I lost touch with until our mid-30s. She reminds me so much of MM. She was a lawyer from a third-rate law school who married her first husband, a building contractor who had an absolutely gorgeous home. They quickly divorced, and she got the house, a huge step up the ladder for her.
One night, as adults, went went out for pizza. She showed up in stiletto heels and a dress much like the brown and white dress Julia Roberts wore in Pretty Woman, except that it was red and white striped. To get pizza with a friend. She posed and posed all over the place, very much like MM. I was embarrassed by her behavior, but this was one of the first times we'd met as adults, so I gave her another chance.
I dropped her as a friend the day she excitedly told me, "I think I met a man- and he's rich!" She had the same look of sly glee that MM shows sometimes, and I knew then what she was really all about. Money. Less than six month later, she married the man and moved up the ladder yet again to being the wife of a lumber baron, with several houses and anything she would ever want. Designer clothes, expensive jewelry, multiple cars, etc. I never told her that my father was a friend of her new husband's father, who had started the lumber company. I wonder if she ever figured it out.
In elementary school, she was a tomboy, overweight, with a pronounced stoop in her back, and who lumbered when she walked.
By the time we had reacquainted as adults, she had completely changed herself into a tall, tanned, slim, beauty with long, flowing almost black hair (henna and coffee dye) and looked very much like Cher. She had become a legend thoughout the state as one of it's best-dressed women.
She had come a long way from being the plain-looking tomboy daughter of a man who worked at a gas station, and she used every tactic that I've seem MM use on Harry and others. I had been very proud of her accomplishments until that statement- "and he's rich!" I never spoke to her again.
I've seen a narc at work, and it's not pleasant to watch.
I see we had a couple people posting "testing" overnight - hope that did not mean there were technical problems. As soon as we get our Archie photo - should be soon! - I will start a new thread.
Re: a Malibu Beach photo op for Archie's birthday. That was one of my original guesses too - but beaches there are currently closed as part of the anti-COVID efforts. (You can Google Malibu's city website for updates - Malibu hiking trails are closed too.)
Of course, if the Sussexes really are living in a fabulous California home, a photo in the well-tended garden would be an obvious choice.
Or, inevitably, they could do "Archie" with a mask, doing his bit for the anti-COVID efforts. Perhaps all three Sussexes with masks. Totally unnecessary if they're at home and isolating together, but highly symbolic.
My money is on Archie still being in the U.K. I am not sure who has custody but I do think the BRF has a lockdown on his location for everyone's safety. The same way they don't trust her with the royal jewels, I don't think they trust her with babies. I believe Harry periodically checks up on Archie and that's why there are rumors of Harry having spent at least some time in the U.K. when he was allegedly in Canada and/or California.
You are probably correct about there not being a beach photo.
I'd posted earlier I thought that's what we'd see---one of the 3 of them with Archie walking between H&M... shot from behind on the beach. Its still possible as Orange County and Ventura County beaches are open. But probably unlikely especially with restrictions in place for non-residents.
Hope we don't see Archie in a mask though. Children under 2 aren't supposed to wear masks. But you could be right that's what we'll see. Babies aren't supposed to be hung in a lopsided carrier sans diaper either or have their weight supported by being held by their necks or be out in the hot sun without a hat. Maybe we'll even see their dogs in masks.
LOL dogs in masks! Good thing they don't own a goldfish.
Weren't the Orange County beaches specifically closed by Governor Newsom? I thought that's where the protests were.
Thank goodness they're right-wing protests. If they were left-wing protests Meg might consider them a photo op.
From Wiki: Harry says, "The decision THAT I MADE for my wife and I to step back..."
MM sure knows how to make other people think it's their idea, doesn't she? Does Harry really believe he made that decision?
One point that struck me in the DM article is that they said it would take many months to thrash out a Megxit deal.
But, HMTQ gave them just a few days to reach a deal. Perhaps she reacted too quickly, and they couldn't come up with an ironclad deal within her time frame. Then MM's lawyers found the loopholes that she could use to her advantage?
......................
That's not the article I was speaking of, but it gives a good idea of how preparations were made for Megxit. The article that I remember mentioned the many British and Canadian government entities involved in a list that was separated by commas. Many were mentioned in the article you posted, but there were more, and I was surprised at some of them. I recall that Boris said he was not involved, but I do remember it mentioning Downing Street as being involved. I don't think it was in the DM.
re: why that People magazine was doled out
Most point out Harry's letter to the press, Vanity Fair article, the Engagement Pics, or the Engagement Interview as when alarm bells about Meg rung in their heads. However, those instances triggered people's intuition but gave no tangible proof against her. However, what she did to her father and the guests she had to her wedding gave tangible reasons to dislike Meg. I believe the People magazine article was in direct response to the overwhelmingly negative online reaction to her wedding. She was mortified that when she had the biggest audience possible, her wedding was "less than" and mired in controversy.
Meg was the media's darling on her wedding day but a lot of the public turned on her visibly before that day. Meg had only the volume of online comments to gauge the public's reaction and most said she was an awful daughter. She didn't realize most Brits and Americans could care less. She worsened her situation when she didn't care to regulate her awful behavior and personality.
Interesting perspective. I personally don't subscribe to the notion that Meg wanted to separate Hairy from the BRF. I think she wanted to stay but was trying to coerce them into accepting a hybrid role for them. Meg did not like the "less than" Kate treatment but wanted the free, subsidized PR so Hollywood and woke-elites would roll out the red carpet for her. They never would if she wasn't in the BRF. Unfortunately for them, H&M's website forced the BRF to tell them to choose. I believe the BRF used soft powers and coercion to force them out completely.
Time will tell.
As for the Cake Smash tradition, that sounds like something out of Marie Antoinette's playbook for her baby. Meg will highlight how tone deaf she is yet again.
Ha ha ha! She sure would take the opportunity to be in the middle of the protests if it suited her agenda. Imagine the photo ops.
Murky Meg mentioned how MM tried to dress like Ivanka (Google "Meghan dresses like Ivanka") and was pressuring her to become friends. Ivanka didn't want to have anything to do with her, and that's when MM spoke out against Trump, saying she'd never move to the US while Trump was in office.
Her IRS records are going to be gone through with a fine-toothed comb after that statement. Trump loves The Queen. Maybe she knows something is coming...
Concerning the book, can a ban be put on the sale of the book in the UK? "Spycatcher" was banned in the UK because it disclosed government secrets, and the novel "Lord Horror" was banned in 1991 for obscenity. I'm not sure what the British law is today, when banning books is so controversial.
OTOH, so many books have been published about the BRF, including supposed insider secrets and from negative standpoints, that she may just ignore it. Scobie isn't exactly the best source for reliable news, anyway. The British press will massacre it, most likely.
And, I think that MM has a deal worked out with Scobie to get a good chunk of money from the sales or from an advance. She's not going to talk for a pittance.
The racism charge against the RF is not only deeply hurtful to its individual members but, as I see it, has implications for the stability of the British Constitution. There are enough people in the UK ready and willing to pick up the idea and run with it - Leftists, SJWs & republicans, sundry ethnic groups, and the generally resentful and feeling-hard-done-bys, plus Rent-a-Mob and those who enjoy rioting and violence for its own sake.
I've mentioned before how ugly the public mood was when Diana died. This could be far, far worse, especially when you add in the other problems: the social and politcal effects of the pandemic; the austerity precipitated by the financial crisis of 2007; the divisions over our relationship with the EU; and the anxieties around mass immigration.
It's over 2 years now since a very perceptive and thoughtful friend said she half-expected civil war. Disasters are piling up.
How MM behaves is evil. Her envy of those who have what she wants could lead her into the position `if I can't have it, I'll destroy it so they can't have it either', whether or not that was part of the initial woke plan, and I can see her steaming on, totally regardless of the consequences.
It's frightening.
Yes, this book is just the latest stunt that goes against the agreement.
I think the year was a way to give HMTQ leverage if they didn't obey within that year, but may not have outlined exactly when or how HMTQ could take action against them within that year. She may be limited to action after the year is over. Lawyer language usually gets into the finest points of law when dealing with contracts, so I don't think it was ironclad because they didn't have time.
Little did they know just how ruthless MM, and now Harry, could be. Now, they've learned, and when the year is over, expect some major changes.
“When the article was released, she showed it to the prince, which made him furious[12] and he replied, "You've just done something incredibly stupid."
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Sarah_McCorquodale
I think we mentioned one of Diana’s suicide attempts, throwing herself down some stairs when she was pregnant with William. Was that when she hit a wardrobe of cupboard? I don’t know about the others but wouldn’t be surprised.
We need the laughs -
`Wallis and Vomit'?
Wonderful!!!
Yes, she is out for destruction. One year was far too long, IMO. Look at the damage she's done in just a few months. As I said above, nobody expected that MM would be so ruthless, and that Harry would go along with it.
Now, they are realizing that MM had a plan in motion by the time of the engagement, and who knows how long before that. I"m sure they are turning over every rock to find out just when MM began her plan to catch Harry, and basically infiltrating the BRF.
Meg was the media's darling on her wedding day but a lot of the public turned on her visibly before that day. Meg had only the volume of online comments to gauge the public's reaction and most said she was an awful daughter. She didn't realize most Brits and Americans could care less. She worsened her situation when she didn't care to regulate her awful behavior and personality.
Here is the UK Daily Mail on the big H/M wedding day. The coverage is 100% positive with loads of photos of British all over celebrating and holding their own wedding parties. The nation is colorfully decked out
But then look at the 17,000 Daily Mail comments and they are sour and negative.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5747477/En-route-Prince-Harry-leaves-Coworth-Park-hotel-royal-Wedding.html#reader-comments
COMMENTS:
PCnomore, London, United Kingdom, 2 years ago
Meghan says she's a social justice campaigner yet spends 100,000 pounds on a wedding dress and 50,000 quid on fireworks. Yeah right. She was also very happy to let BOTH her mother and father go ban-krupt while hoarding her millions for herself. HYPOCRITE. Charity starts at home. Only one of your relatives showed up at the wedding. WONDER WHY?
____________________
MissAVermont, Burlington VT USA, United States, 2 years ago
So am I. Initially I had no opinion then when things started coming out about her personal background, acting, etc..I had a change of mind and said to myself the R F must be oit of their ever loving minds to allow this to move forward. By then the family dysfunction appeared. One guest of her family - just her mother?? Unreal
_____________________
sea lover115, Vancouver, Canada, 2 years ago
And to think ONLY 2 years ago they didn't even know each other - and Meghan was living with Cory Vitiello (wonder also what he thinks about this? let alone MM's father!) but I wish Harry well, truly do .... it was very moving to see the two brothers William and Harry walking down the street together to the chapel. God save the Queen.... love her! - and she looks fabulous!!
It isn't a woke plan of MM's. Being woke is just a cover. She has far bigger plans than just being a "woke" icon. When you take on the BRF and the press as the first steps, "woke" goes out the window and destruction and world domination comes into play.
Yes, being labelled a racist just because I don't like one person is disgusting and hurtful to me. I was marching for civil rights decades before she was born.
______
I'm not sure I ever read the government-involvement MEGXIT article @JocelynsBellinis is referring to. But one issue never addressed officially so far as the public is concerned is whether Harry can still serve as a Counselor of State. By act of Parliament, that requires being domiciled in the UK.
---------
@JocelynsBellinis wrote,
"And, I think that MM has a deal worked out with Scobie to get a good chunk of money from the sales or from an advance. She's not going to talk for a pittance."
If M did get a chunk of the advance it's long gone or long hidden from Harry. And the co-author would have gotten something. So whether M makes alot likely depends on how well it sells. Personally I can't imagine it will be more than a flash in the pan. Once the juicy bits have been reported...
I posted a "test" the other day, but that was to check if I'd done my photo correctly. I haven't had any problems with the site.
@JocelynsBellinis: I love your book titles. May I add one to the series:
Meghan: How I improved UK race relations
Meghan: How to dress while pregnant
Meghan: How to care for your baby
We could go on...
@AvaC: I don't know where you live (in the UK, I think) but if you have a Polish or Eastern European supermarket near you, you should be able to get flour. I found organic wholemeal rye bread flour for a friend (had to ask what sort it was as I don't speak Polish). They also have yeast (dry & fresh). Good luck.
If she got a part of an advance on the book, I agree that it's long gone now, probably to pay the lawyers in the MoS case. She has to pay her part of any advance back, anyway, from her portion of the proceeds of the sale of the book. If it doesn't sell well, she has to pay it back from her own pocket, as does Scobie and the other author.
Most new authors would hold an advance until they saw how the sales of the book were going, but we all know that MM spends money as soon as she gets it. They'd put it into reliable, easily cashed out account that draws interest, but with COVID, interest rates are at almost zero, and could go into the negative. If they had to pay back the advance, they could still keep the interest, if there is any.
But, MM doesn't make wise decisions with money and spends it as fast as she gets it.
Great additions to the book title list!
During this one year they will be getting two million pounds per year of Duchy monies from Charles as the D&D of Malibu get their profit plans in place. Who know what might happen. Hollywood just might be fully up and running by September and giving Megsy's projects consideration. Reality is that covid-V had minimally impacted California and stupid Newsom is dragging his feet on reopening. You cannot catch a virus or anything out on the beach on a sunny day.
When that VF issue came out, with a cover that was great for a magazine but not for a possible future royal, I immediately thought of Elvis. Priscilla got Elvis because she never never never talked about him to anyone during her equivalent waity katie years (I'm not just talking about her schooldays(!) but later). Any woman who did talk about him was immediately out. I thought Meghan had made a big mistake and was surprised she got away with it. Yes, looking back, that was a major red flag.
OT - many thanks to those with advice for flour/yeast/cakes - you're all so kind and helpful. What a great forum this is.
Her wokery - I didn't intend to imply that I thought she meant it! As you say, it's superficial and for her own purposes. Just camouflage.
Spiritual adviser to the Queen: HM has her own chaplain(s). The most notable in the present context is Rose Hudson-Wilkin, from Jamaica, now Bishop of Dover - first black woman in the Episcopate.
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Rose_Hudson-Wilkin
(Guli Francis Dehqani aftiwas the first `minority ethnic'woman to be a Bishop. Her father was an Iranian churchman, her mother British - another family to have suffered grievously under oppression:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/may/21/anglicanism.iran )
Makeup artist Ruby Hammer (MBE) has explained in the DM why MM looked so different in the Zoom meeting as she "mentored" the young student. Of course, the word "mentor' was not used in this article after the backlash, and has been replaced with "spoke with".
Hammer, who has done MM's makeup before, including MM's makeup for going on dates with Harry, said that it's was MM's deft hand at applying makeup and that she brushed her eyebrows. Of course, that completely explains why MM looks so different! :/
Looking further into Hammer's background, I found that her life partner is Martin Kuzmarski, the COO of The Soho House.
Hammer also has a makeup product line, a website, a blog, does online makeup tutorials and has an Instagram page. Her first husband was George Hammer, who was responsible for bringing the Aveda line to QVC and founder of the Urban Retreat beauty brand.
BTW, SoHo House is celebrating it's 25th anniversary this year, and is now selling art prints, The SoHo House Editions, a "restricted version" of prints by selected artists of their favorite house.
What on earth does a restricted version mean? Is it a limited edition, meaning only so many prints will be made? Is it restricted to being only available to SoHo House members?
websfavorite.com/lifestyle/sohohouse-is-launching-a-collection
Sorry, I'm now on my tablet and don't know how to make a link on it.
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's two-word takedown of Queen and royal family
4 May, 2020 6:36pm
Part1
Just over a month after the sensationally quit the royal family, Meghan and Harry have dealt the Queen and Co a death blow.
By: Daniela Elser
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's two-word takedown of Queen and royal family
4 May, 2020 6:36pm
Just over a month after the sensationally quit the royal family, Meghan and Harry have dealt the Queen and Co a death blow.
The story of how the biggest royal expose in history came to be began in a transport cafe outside of London over bacon and eggs in 1991.
According to Diana's biographer Tina Brown, it was there that a young journalist named Andrew Morton and one of the Princess' longtime friends, Dr James Colthurst, first met. Over the next 10 months, Colthurst would act as a go-between, ferrying interviews Diana recorded on cassettes to Morton as he worked on a book about her.
Diana knew the book's publication and its revelations about her eating disorder, suicide attempts and details about Charles' infidelity would be incendiary. However, by all accounts, she made the decision to participate because she felt that going public once and for all was the final, desperate move she could make.
After a decade trapped in a farce of a marriage to a man whose love lay elsewhere and after years chafing against the starched rigidity of a, in her opinion, deeply uncaring family, dramatically revealing her full hand was the last, most audacious play she had. As Brown writes: "Diana's friends … believed that she faced a choice – explode or implode."
When the book was first excerpted in 1992 in the Sunday Times it sent shockwaves through the royal family, Britain, and the world, leaving the public transfixed by the tell-all which ripped away the discrete curtain that had protected Windsor life. Gone was discretion and the veneer of royal amiability, and here was a decade's worth of fury and searing hurt which immediately dealt the monarchy's image a severe blow.
While Morton's book firmly put public favour on Diana's side, forever affixing the victim's mantle to her shoulders, it infuriated the royal family and ultimately doomed her relationship with them.
This particular history lesson is worth keeping in mind given the news that a new biography of Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, will soon hit the shelves. On August 11, Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the making of a Modern Royal Family, will be released.
New details about the book, written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, two royal reporters known to be sympathetic to the couple, emerged over the weekend when it was listed for pre-order online (based on pre-orders it's already a bestseller on Amazon).
According to the book's description, the hotly anticipated title will go: "beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple."
New details about the book, written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, two royal reporters known to be sympathetic to the couple, emerged over the weekend when it was listed for pre-order online (based on pre-orders it's already a bestseller on Amazon).
According to the book's description, the hotly anticipated title will go: "beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple."
And that is leaving aside the fact it would be deeply hurtful, especially for the Queen and Prince Charles as both Harry's grandmother and father and given they have both worked tirelessly for decade upon grinding, dull decade in service to the monarchy.
No matter what salacious details or not are offered up in this biography, news of its imminent arrival will surely be about as welcome behind Palace gates as a troop of PETA's most ardent supporters at a Sandringham shoot.
The book's publication will most likely set off a global media storm, even if that just means having to contend with a grab bag of already-run rumours being rehashed in thousands of news reports.
Given the royal family is currently enjoying a particular purple patch in terms of public support thanks to their chipper efforts during the coronavirus crisis, this sort of messy personal media squall is exactly what they would be desperate to avoid.
While the couple has yet to confirm or deny their involvement in Finding Freedom, or to comment on it at all, August 11 looks likely to be a particularly nerve-racking day on both sides of the Atlantic. The stakes have never been higher.
Daniela Elser is a royal expert and writer with 15 years experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles.
`Aisle-Altar-Hymn'
Here's how it works. The NY Times uses sales figures from selected booksellers. All of the authors and publishers know this, so all they have to do is to go to those booksellers and buy up all of the copies their book. That's why you'll see a great read as a #1 best seller, and a #2 best seller can be a book that is of little to no literary value. This leaves out the poor authors who may have a masterpiece on their hands, but the publisher may not want to take a chance on backing them and pay for the books, and the poor author can't, either. So the poor author with the masterpiece will not make into the big leagues as an author.
Amazon's pre-sales can be worked the same way. Just put in a lot of pre-sale orders for your book, and you've got a hit. Of course, it takes a lot of money, but Scobie's publisher has the money to do it.
I do think it will be a substantial hit. Public interest in The Harkles is at an all time high. Even people who don't like them will want to read what kind of spin they will put on their lives through Scobie, even if it's full of lies and half-truths.
Thanks! I'll give it a try tomorrow. It's almost 4 a.m. here, and time to get some sleep. My sleep pattern is all messed up with this lockdown.
As a sometime-printmaker, I'm not impressed with how these prints are being pushed.
`limited edition' -yes, but... there's no indication of whether the `edition' is limited by the number printed (eg 20, 50, 500, 5 000 or 5 000 000), after which the `plate' (or digital program) is destroyed, or by time (`as many as we can run off by June, Christmas, this time next year...')
I infer from the Observer piece that the editions are limited by number - but no indication of how many.
I suppose if they were `original artists' prints' they'd say so - the only ones worth having for investment purposes, assuming you choose the artist wisely.
No indication of print process (lithographs? linocuts? Giclee prints? - the last-named is a con. It sounds smart/special but is just a good photographic process)
Are the prints signed individually or in the plate? (I've got a recent `John Piper' lithograph to commemorate the destruction of the old Coventry Cathedral, executed by AN Other, image taken from a Piper painting of the bomb damage, done on a limestone block that Piper signed years ago, before he died, obviously.
The thing is, the gallery was clear about exactly what it was selling, I was not conned, a large chunk of the price went to support Coventry Cathedral. The main thing is it looks good, dignifies an otherwise boring chimney breast - and goes with the Oriental heath-rug that was made in Belgium!)
It doesn't say much for the clientele from the `creative industries' if they don't know the right questions to ask and get taken in by them.
And they're so damn' self-referential.
https://observer.com/2020/03/soho-house-launches-soho-home-editions-limited-edition-artist-collection/
Meghan Markle allegedly screamed at Kate Middleton’s staff
http://theindependent.sg/meghan-markle-allegedly-screamed-at-kate-middletons-staff/
'Screamed' is the strongest word I can remember seeing in a headline about Meghan. The rest of the article reverts to her 'shouting' but the stronger version would tie in with the behaviour that was rumoured for the Australian trip. Not a publication I'm familiar with though.
On the other hand, here's yet more coverage decrying Kate. There seems to be a specific, steady drip-drip of bitterness towards Kate in the more trashy media outlets in the last week or so. Wonder where it's coming from?
https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-outperformed-kate-middleton-in-some-royal-engagements-according-to-experts.html/
Like a girls' fight in the playground. The difference being that Kate's not playing. Thank goodness, yet again, for Kate. I'd give up royal watching if she wasn't there to cheer me up and make me feel that there are still some things right in the world.
Knowing how much Rache loves her anagrams, how about “The Git “
1. As a friend of two party planners, each with at least 20 years experience: They both have never been wrong in predicting 100 percent divorces with every couple who smashes wedding cake in each other’s faces. Very angry people, and it is usually the man who begins the shoving of cake in the face. Baby smashing cake is a sign, like wedding smashing, of low-class people. If a baby takes its piece of cake and messily eats it, that is a different matter, and very cute, IMO.
2. Harry has become the definition of chutzpah, accusing people of racism. His non-stop belittling of Pakistanis, proud wearing and parading around in his Nazi uniform, and much more makes his “everybody is racist” too weird to even understand how stupid he has always been, and how racist he himself is to think that others are like him. (The old definition of chutzpah was a man murders his parents, and then pleads for mercy from the judge because he is an orphan.)
3. Harry was a terrible Officer in the army, and showed deep disrespect to his superiors. He is also a mean person. His girlfriend Cressida broke up with him because of his nasty temper, cheating and more, saying that Harry is not in any way a nice person.
4. Most Americans do not care to even hear the names of Meghan and Harry. The vast majority of Americans do not know who they are, to put it bluntly, especially young, educated people. They do not follow royalty, although most know of the Queen (called the Queen if England, never referred to as the Queen of UK and GB).
5. What in the world are the two freaks thinking, when writing a tell-all book grossly called Finding Freedom, and tittle-tattling about Harry’s Family? Anything inappropriate, as the title and it’s implication of them setting up a competing “Royal” court, and secret that is shared, other than about what will probably be half the book, Harry’s peculiar, non-stop whining obsession with his dead mother, will probably lead to the permanent losses of HRHs, and Duke of Sussex title. He was born Prince Henry, and probably will be allowed to be a Prince, but he will be just another “Prince” in Hollywood, like Michael Jackson’s son “Prince.”
6. I doubt Harry will be welcomed back very soon, unless he behaves impeccably. So far, every day brings something new and stupid from the pair, including the unbelievable smash talk about a revered and honored judge who got rid of much if a garbage sewerage an American court would never have been allowed to bring up to begin with, and the entire case, about trivial family matters of public celebrities, would have been thrown out as soon as filed. This lawsuit by the two scumbags is now a big cow pie, and MOS has countersued, too, so now the scumbags have to go through that trial, too.
' Sadly, the stairs incident wasn’t the only time Princess Diana put her life in jeopardy. “We had a few trying-to-cut-wrists, throwing things out of windows, breaking glass,” she said, recalling a time she threw herself against a glass display case at Kensington Palace. She explains that she “gave everybody a fright” but that Charles still didn’t take her seriously'
https://www.cheatsheet.com/health-fitness/why-princess-diana-threw-herself-down-stairs-while-pregnant.html/
- With good photos! 57,605 views•Nov 4, 2019
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/education-39656299/cake-smash-the-new-way-to-celebrate-your-baby-s-first-birthday
"I don't believe Charles didn't take Diana seriously, but he probably didn't have a clue how to deal with a severely unbalanced wife."
I agree. Charles would not have been prepared for that sort of drama and emotional instability. Many of us wouldn't be but Charles's upbringing definitely would not have prepared him.
And Diana wasn't just self-destructive. She pushed her stepmother, Raine, down the stairs too. I understand coping with a parent's remarriage can be difficult. And Diana wasn't the only Spencer child to resent Raine. But Raine was 60 at the time she was pushed and had been married to Diana's father for about 13 years. And Diana wasn't a child when it happened, she was 28 and a mother of two by then.
https://nypost.com/2019/10/23/princess-diana-pushed-her-stepmother-down-a-staircase-documentary/
To Diana's credit, she did make amends to Raine before she died and they became fairly close. But still, deliberately pushing a 60-year old (or really anyone) down the stairs is pretty bad.
I realized something about the book and Megxit and add in the past behaviors.
The book technically is not by either of them so if there is something about how they are not supposed to be benefiting from from anything in print, this would be a mere technicality as neither is the author.
If it does "well", it could reignite some sort of real book deal for them under their own names (w/wo ghost writer assistance ... we all know how well that might work out I think).
Anything which would be covered in the Megxit agreement as you will not reveal any of the following would be treated like the Vogue cover or well I must of have mentioned that to them before the deal and had forgotten I said that.
What I would like to know is: could the BRF sue the publisher that there could be State Secrets divulged concerns and needing to read the manuscript before publishing? Reading the contract as well? It does look like the publishing arm is British, not American so could there be some sort of social delicate discussion?
That kind of injunction could delay the publish date and really up the hand of the BRF for the rest of the year as well as past year one.
Another thing I don't know anything about is how the UK gets their taxation information, especially money coming from the US - or how the taxation of this book would shake out? It might be one of those fine toothed combs by UK and USA, follow the money trails.
As for the idea that this book could propel her/them upward in the same way that the book did for Diana is, I think, more hope and wishful thinking than likely. Diana had put in years of work at a member of the BRF, photographed well (maintained or increased the value of her sellability) and was already pretty universally well thought of by that time. M, despite the amount of positive press she has received, is toting a lot of suitcase history for a much, much tinier time period. The missteps seem to increase in proportion with each one instead of a period of regrouping to figure out how to not make that kind of mistake again. And the people who are negative to her are fairly vocal and not backing down.
A blip of fame like the Vogue cover, the clothing collection, the cookbook intro - trotted out every once in a while and then fades back until the next blip when it is used as historical filler.
I can so see Markle instructing SS to do massive bulk buys of this book as a way of improving her negotiating points with the BRF. But she would have to do it with HER money and yet more $$$ wasted on a PR campaign. If they don’t actually show a REAL picture of Archie, not one that is photoshopped or a child’s face covered in cake, or the back of him, or him burying his face in Harry’s shoulder. then I think they are done. The book will not sell if she doesn’t produce a real child.
Reminds me of Dean Martin's laid-back comment to his audiences, that he'd sold 2 million records and if they didn't believe him he'd take them down to his basement as they were all down there ...
Which current royals have porphyria?
I think it was the brother of the Duke of Gloucestershire who had it (the one who died in a plane crash) but by then it was treatable. I was not aware that there was anyone currently in the royal family who had the condition.
Will Meghan's "lifestyle" blog include the following? 1) How to sleep your way to the top 2) How to marry rich 3) How to abandon your friends and family after they have served their purpose 4) How to manipulate and isolate your partner from his/her friends and family 5) How to make yourself look orange from the use of too much bronzer 6) How to spend millions on clothes that are ill-suited for your body type, are ill-fitting, and are inappropriate for the occasion 7) How to have a manic, fake smile 8) How to fail as an actress 9) How to buy teeth that look like Chicklets 10) How to lose court battles I could go on, but I will stop here.
This laughable Omid Scooby Doo book is a Malibu Two head fake. Their Omid toady will kiss her non-Royale feet for whatever table scraps she will throw in his general direction. Logic says that unfortunately for Scooby, Megsy will hold back all the good stuff/gossip/photos for her own book which might come out in two years due to the Queen's rules that were layed down for their Megxit. That reminding you, that the Charles ATM is funding at 2 million £ per year via the Duchy of Cornwall rent payers.
Megsy's future thinking in 16 months will be - "Queen and her courtiers can go to hell. I will publish in America!! And this will travel to UK and all over the world"
Declining finances for the Malibu Two say that Megsy's big Exposé/book will come out eventually as in some time in 2021. Meaning that the Scooby book served Megsy as pre-publicity.
"Full circle, she's now back to being an unemployed actress with a blog. How ironic!"
"Yes, the title of the book is incredibly insulting. She makes it sound like she was shoveled inside the Tower of London by the Queen and England is Alcatraz. She will continue to insult, leech and damage the RF until the Queen or Charles remove their titles."
Re shooting: Sandringham is for pheasant shoots in autumn/winter.
The Glorious 12th is the first day of the grouse season - almost entirely in Scotland (eg Balmoral), although I think Bowland Forest in Lancashire is a grouse moor, but that's Duke of Westminster's land.
I need to check about Rose Hudson-Wilkin She was definitely Chaplain to the Speaker of the House of Commons (I can't imagine the last Speaker, Bercow, seeking guidance!) and I've heard her referred to as `Chaplain to the Queen' but haven't found confirmation on line.
The Chapel Royal is part of the royal household:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Peculiar
` The chapels associated with the Chapel Royal, which refers not to a building but to an establishment in the Royal Household; a body of priests and singers to explicitly serve the spiritual needs of the Sovereign., Peculiarly, because the Bishop of London is customarily appointed the Dean of the Chapel Royal, the bishop typically has authority of these chapels as dean, but does not have authority over them as bishop even though they are geographically within the Diocese of London.'
There are clergy on hand to give HM spiritual counsel.
I agree that Charles probably couldn't cope with Diana's instability - I doubt if any of us could unless we were professionals. I read he realised she needed professional help and called somebody in. I have read since that though that her sisters, Jane and Sarah (yes, she whom Charles dumped) knew how unstable she was but kept quiet about it.
As far as I can see, there's no definite view on the nature of her `instability', whether it was a personality disorder or illness. It's difficult to discuss without stirring up her supporters.
I gathered that she too felt she had a destiny to be the wife and mother of Kings... but perhaps not the Power Behind/On the Throne.
Wikipedia says Diana put in 11 years as a Royal before she split from Charles and the entire BRF. Contrast this with stupid flighty Megsy who put in less than two years of Royal service with lots of shirking on her part and Hapless too. Stupid Megsy thinks she can make Hollywood money after flaking out, going rogue from the BRF after only 18 months? Only her young, non-educated will clamor over this.
WIKIPEDIA
Diana came to prominence in 1981 upon her engagement to Prince Charles, the eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II, after a brief courtship. Their wedding took place at St Paul's Cathedral in 1981 and made her Princess of Wales, a role in which she was enthusiastically received by the public. The couple had two sons, the princes William and Harry, who were then second and third in the line of succession to the British throne. Diana's marriage to Charles, however, suffered due to their incompatibility and extramarital affairs. The couple separated in 1992, soon after the breakdown of their relationship became public knowledge. The details of their marital difficulties became increasingly publicised, and the marriage ended in divorce in 1996.
'Twas Prince William of Gloucester, after whom Wills is named.
Current Duke is his younger brother Richard, which struck me as a not terribly auspicious name, given how a previous holder of the title, Richard of York & Gloucester, ended up.
Perhaps the bad juju went with the York title instead!
Another reason for both Wills & HM to be in contact with MI5 - the book could be banned at least in the UK if it did.
I wonder if too if she could be arrested for spying? Secret recordings? Did somebody say `invasion of privacy'?
Btw I read that the separation of the 2 Royal Foundations came after `discrepancies' were found in the accounts of the original foundation shortly after MM came aboard. Pure coincidence, of course...
If 2 per cent of the population is against the authorities, the authorities have a problem. If it's 5 percent, they're in dead trouble.
Books can be damaging. Morton's book dictated solely by Diana was. But they are the double-edged sword. Megsy can leak ugly stories via her book but there are plenty of people she insulted or offended who can tell their side of the story to a willing author. She would have been better advised not to cooperate with any book for this particular reason. Silence is golden in this situation.
What they definitely did was do anything and everything to create fervor around the date Archie was born. Confusing information about which hospital, home birth, etc. I think some of these crazy conspiracies detract from the things that H & M have actually done. So depending how on board everyone is on the surrogacy theory, I would let it go. I've said it a million times but Meghan knew, desperately knew, that she had to conceive Harry's children. That was job #1 whether before the wedding or shortly after. Archie is her golden egg. I hope the boy is well cared for.
I agree with above posters that Meghan will have some sort of different photo and 'artsy' representation of Archie. Different from the types of pics that are put out by William and Kate. I look forward to seeing the little guy. It's interesting to see if he'll look like Harry.
Two recent and IRRITATING stories about Meghan and Harry. She's going to start another Tig Like blog and they are buying a $13 million dollar house in LA?! Is Meghan just completely delusional about her popularity?! Have they paid back Frogmore???? Can Charles gain a pair and deal with these two? I'm an American but I would be so incensed about them and their spending if I was British!
Diana later in life said that she was not trying to commit suicide while pregnant with William; she was just trying to get attention. I think Diana believed all her press, especially later in her life, and would never be suicidal, as she had too much self-love. And to be fair, she loved her children too much to ever deliberately try to self-hurt or try to commit suicide. She was unhappy, and always found others to blame for her own issues. Harry is so like his mother it is scarey. In my opinion.
Interestingly, It is not necessary for a person to have signed the Official Secrets Act in order to be bound by it. The 1989 Act states that a person can be “notified” that he or she is bound by it; and Government employees will usually be informed via their contract of employment if they must observe the Act. (https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7422/)
Yes, you are correct and I believe it was William of Gloucester who sadly died so young. However, the royals aren’t renown for sharing medical data, so it’s anyone’s guess if any minor royals have inherited the condition since.
I’ve had to sign The Official Secrets Act for reasons I’m not going into. However, I’m flummoxed how you can be duty and lawfully bound by an Act if you haven’t agreed to it by signing it? I admit I signed the act in 1987, it’s been amended since.
With regard to Harry and Megsy, I’m pretty sure this Act has nothing that would need to include them or other members of the royal family.
Diana was proud of pushing her stepmother down a staircase. She was also a very nasty child, and made sure every nanny/governess was miserable and would quickly leave Althorp. Harry sounds and acts very much like his semi-homicidal mother. Think for a moment - what if Raine was seriously injured or broke her neck? What person has such hate inside that she could murder somebody from jealousy? And jealous of being married to her father. Instead of blaming her father for not telling her or her siblings about his new marriage (incredibly selfish and cowardly thing to do), she took out her crazy rage at Raine. Her hysteria was seen with her incessant calling and stalking of her married lovers’ wives, at least four of them. Any other person would have been arrested for many if the things a very sick Diana did to other people.
Diana later in life said that she was not trying to commit suicide while pregnant with William; she was just trying to get attention. I think Diana believed all her press, especially later in her life, and would never be suicidal, as she had too much self-love. And to be fair, she loved her children too much to ever deliberately try to self-hurt or try to commit suicide. She was unhappy, and always found others to blame for her own issues. Harry is so like his mother it is scarey. In my opinion.
I have never seen such unbecoming info about the late Diana. that M tried to be a clone of. But all clones are fakes. And it (yours) all rings true. You obviously remember from back then. Back in the Jurassic age. Before the internet gave us easy searches, just so long as the original source has not pooped out one way or another.
And yeah, thanks again.
🐛
Books can be damaging. Morton's book dictated solely by Diana was. But they are the double-edged sword. Megsy can leak ugly stories via her book......
It never entered my mind but you are right. When the sub-par doofus Scooby book gets released this will give Maniac Megsy (in her bi-polar up phase) a Mega-Megsy opportunity to spill on the Royals and probably via surrogates real or not. And of course Megs will spill to the DM too though via a secondary.
But as I have posted before, she will save the best Royale spill for her own book, that she makes all the money on.
If she's not bound by the OS Act, is she in the same position as a foreign agent? Is it a form of espionage to go snooping, even if its for her own purposes?
For a laugh now - out of curiosity, I had a shufti at the books about mm on Waterstone's site. www.waterstones.com
I just searched `Meghan' here are the titles that came up, in the order they came up for me; some are just by authors called Meghan but there are some amusing juxtapositions:
Meghan
Halima Sadat
Meghan
Andrew Morton
Meghan
Caroline Jones
Rainbow Magic:Meghan the Wedding Sparkle Fairy
Daisy Meadows
Harry & Meghan: The…
Halima Sadat
Runner's World How to Poop
Meghan Kita
You're Not Special
Meghan Rienks
How Not to Be a Dick
Meghan Doherty
The Enchanted Hour
Meghan Cox Gurdon
The Content Strategy…
Meghan Casey
An Analysis of Michel…
Meghan Kallman
Selfish, Shallow and…
Meghan Daum
Harry & Meghan – The Love Story…
Emily Herbert
Astronaut Handbook
Meghan McCarthy
Harry and Meghan Paper Dolls
Eileen Miller
Harry and Meghan(revised)
Katie Nicholl
Meghan the Wedding Sparkle Fairy is a children's story; `Daisy Meadows' is a group of authors who have produced a very large number of titles. Sue Mongredien is the author of this book apparently.
I had a look at the synopsis:
Rainbow Magic: Meghan the Wedding Sparkle Fairy - Rainbow Magic (Paperback)
Daisy Meadows (author), Georgie Ripper (illustrator)
Join best friends Rachel and Kirsty for a very magical Royal Wedding!
Meghan's special magic looks after the magic of matrimony everywhere. But when naughty Jack Frost steals her magical triple-jewelled engagement ring (that she wears on a charm round her neck), he breaks the spell of love in both the fairy and human worlds! Couples and best friends everywhere keep falling out, and forgetting what it is they love about each other. Kirsty and Rachel must help Meghan get her ring back before the Fairyland royal wedding, and weddings everywhere, are ruined!
'These stories are magic; they turn children into readers!' ReadingZone.com
What do you make of it? Fan fiction or something else?
I loved the novel “The Royal Mob” a fictional book based on the life of Princess Victoria of Hesse, granddaughter of Queen Victoria, sister of Tsarina Alexandra, Grand Duchess of Russia Elizabeth (Ella) and Irene. Her widowed sister Ella was part mad, Victoria’s daughter Alice (Victoria had married her cousin Prince Louis Of Battenberg) was deaf, and was mentally unwell, and Alice was the mother of Philip.
Whew! There is much more, but I bore myself.
That's all -- not really an important comment : )
The usual answer is `for the cash' but did they conclude that the damage that could be caused by accusations of racism would be greater than that done to an individual barrister who looked incompetent?
He could be fired as the scapegoat.
They may have welled titled their book, Free at Last. Maybe They could play Swing Low Sweet Chariot in the background.
Commin for to carry me home
(like back in LA home?) humming along
Christine - I hear what you are saying about the look. My difficulty is the white dress (would she have risked it if she had so soon after birth or would she have looked so post baby that long after leaking wasn't a big deal), the shape of the belly (not symmetrical? more boxy?) and the whole video of the baby.
The "baby" in the video never moved, kicked, sighed, turned their head or visible breathed. Even when jostled or the way it was held.
How she touched the baby was not medically sound (to the soft spot). If she had given birth to a real child, this do not mess with this area lecture would have been given to her (as mother).
It seemed (it's been a while since I have watched it) that when asked to get a better look at the baby, that doesn't happen (almost a let me make it harder for you move).
Difficulties with the birth cert, announcement (on many levels including lying) and the two week oops comment. Once I know you have lied like that, it is hard not to first begin with: Are they lying this time? so everything is always scrutinized for validity and then for content. It becomes a trust issue about this person(s).
So I can't completely give up the idea of surrogate. Too much else is off.
I loved Nicholas and Alexandra as a book and as a movie (well done for once when taken from the book). FYI: are you aware of the later Massie book of the photographs (Yale Library I recall) that they used for his book. The friend who made it out with a photo album of the duplicates. Stunning. OTMA
There is a new book being flogged on DM about sex escapades and more of the BRF by someone who (it sounds like) was running around at the time of Princess Margaret. Thought is might be forerunner for the Omid book but different publishers. One of the parts detailed two things which are of interest today but it wasn't mentioned that way: During the King George reign, the ruling of my grandchildren belong to me, not my children AND that the son/daughter were setting up a rival court which increased a lot of bad feelings between them.
🐛
I found out about her during the Sandringham summit earlier this year. I was immediately taken with her, partly as she was beautiful and elegant in middle and old age and mainly because she gave up her royal title but spent the rest of her life still taking part in charitable endeavours and attending, impeccably, all the formal royal events in the annual calendar. (Actually, until Meghan it didn't really cross our minds that someone WOULDN'T be impeccable at royal events. Meghan's a trailblazer but not the kind she thinks she is).
Lady Patricia Ramsay's life provides an interesting juxtaposition to the Harkles. A lady who lived a distinguished, useful and admirable life, fulfilling the duties of her caste even though she gave up her title. I also read that she was the first royal bride to marry in Westminster Abbey for 600 years. I'm now trying to find out more about her.
Her marriage was reportedly a deeply happy one and both she and her husband are buried at Frogmore. I realised then that although I've known about Frogmore for decades because of Queen Victoria and later the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, it is now tainted, like so many other things, by the Harkles.
Funding Freedom by HRH THE Prince of Wales
"I remembered my image of the man trapped in a cage with a tigress. Maybe this was my moment to reach for the escape hatch. The tigress seemed sufficiently distracted – or subdued-to let me get out unscathed. How wrong could I be. Wrestling with the problem of how to go about resigning was made no easier by the fact that I was feeling so physically and mentally wrecked. In this condition I was particularly vulnerable to attack from unexpected quarters. The assault, when it came, consequently caught me with my guard down. I too fell prey to the Princess’s particular style of aggression, which with sinuous dexterity combined a radiant smile with a knife between the shoulder blades. [...]
"It was my turn for execution. The chosen instrument, as so often before, was the pager. As others had before me, I now got the poisonous message treatment. I was sitting in a deserted railway carriage, staring out at a pitch-black Wiltshire, when with an immediate stab of dread I felt the familiar summons of my pager.
"I fumbled for the button to stop that awful, reptilian vibration. Then I stared uncomprehendingly at the stark letters.
"'The Boss knows about your disloyalty and your affair.'
"It was anonymous. I had to read it several times before the enormity of it sank in. The message was timed so that, but for a delay on the train, I would have received it as I walked through my front door. Then I knew it was from the Princess. She was always so punctual. There had been a spate of such messages addressed to members of her husband’s staff and nobody doubted where they came from. It spoke volumes for the atmosphere in which we were working by that time. Recently her own chauffeur – long an object of unfounded suspicion – had told me practically in tears of his own barbed message.
"I was practically in tears myself now, though whether from rage, self-pity or impotence I was not sure. I knew that an attack on my professional or personal reputation was exactly the form of retribution which the Princess would choose once she had recognized that I was slipping beyond her control. I also knew with a frightening conviction that she could do untold damage to my future re-employment chances if she chose to use her media muscle. As for my private life … My horror deepened. I knew I had not had an affair with anyone, but that was an insignificant detail to someone who could accuse her children’s nanny as the Princess had done. I told nobody of my agonized thoughts except God – over and over in the course of a sleepless night. He had heard most of it before."
She will go down in history as a woman who had once in a lifetime opportunity and blew it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8265055/Meghan-Markle-called-princess-diva-behavior-set.html
https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/royals/harry-and-meghans-revenge-book-is-a-huge-mistake-according-to-insiders/ar-BB13Ac0Q?ocid=spartanntp
I think the thing that bothers me the most about this latest attempt to trash the Cambridges is that Megsy KNOWS they will not respond with their side of the story. They will continue to behave appropriately and carry on with "Never Complain, Never Explain." She knows this, which is why she is using this venue to continue to push her agenda that she was unwelcome and poorly treated by all the Windsors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8265055/Meghan-Markle-called-princess-diva-behavior-set.html?ito=social-facebook&fbclid=IwAR2vNYhJgv3Hu9ygcIaxaize84kN2OpnvttG-nq1C6MLrbX4GS6INPHw8yo&fbclid=IwAR0fUo5o4Z4VuJKN5isiG90dHak2GEFnHPewV109TWxyy9EZMCIzc5rHQso
I said that the royals aren’t renown for sharing medical data, so it’s anyone’s guess if any minor royals have inherited the condition since. So the answer is we don’t know, and to assume we know is rather ignorant. Just because something isn’t in the public domain doesn’t make it untrue. Also, there are many television based documentaries about the royals that go into a lot of detail, but there’s normally no print version of the data. You don’t know everything, you can’t truly say something isn’t true just because you can’t find written evidence of it. The evidence just may not be (presently) available in the public domain .
"H&M have basically been complaining since??? Since I don't know when..."
True. The way I see it, Harry introduced M as his girlfriend to the world with that blustery letter of complaint about the press in Nov 2016. I don't doubt M manipulated him into going public with those often untrue complaints (no evidence there were any problems at her house, for example.) But she wanted them to be seen as a couple. But most people didn't even know who she was then.
To say that you have the right to speculate and spread rumours as if they are reasonable, rational and supported facts and then demand that proof be provided to you that they are untrue is actually quite disturbing.
Here is where logic and rationality comes into it: haemophilia, epilepsy, dementia/Alzheimer's ... these are not conditions that are easily hidden. Only three working royals have withdrawn from public life (Prince Philip, Prince Andrew, and Duchess of Kent). There is no evidence to support that any of them have any of these conditions, and if they did, it would be impossible to have kept it hidden.
(If Prince Philip does have senile dementia and wants to keep that hidden, then there is no shame in that, but there is nothing at all to support this speculation. Nothing at all. If you have ever known anyone with senile dementia you will know that it is not something that can be kept hidden.)
Porphyria perhaps could be hidden but why do so? Dyslexia, scoliosis, hyperemesis gravidarum ... all conditions that BRF members have not hidden and have talked about openly. There is no shame in having any of these conditions and there is no need to hide them, as the BRF have not.
This is what you sound like, and it is quite disturbing:
You ...... (fill in with whatever). It is rather ignorant to assume that what I am saying about you is not true since not everything about you is in the public domain and you may just be hiding .... Anyone who questions my stating as fact ..... about you is ignorant and doesn't know everything. There is no written evidence of what I am spreading around about you, but anyone questioning my saying these things about you and stating them as facts (and how dare anyone question me) is just ignorant and must know that just because there is no evidence does not mean it is not true.
Before you take everything in the above article as the truth, consider the following, as quoted from the article:
Royal expert Katie Nicholl exclusively tells OK!
Katie Nicholl has been around for years, commenting on the BRF. However, did she speak to either of the Sussexes? How does she know that Meghan is a fabulous cook, that Archie will have an organic, sugar-free birthday cake, about the presents, about what the Queen will do, and so on?
Do you think she has spoken to Meghan and is being used for a bit of PR?
I have seen Katie Nicholl pop up in a number of documentaries. She is nice. She almost always gushes. I doubt she has insider knowledge on the Sussexes, but if Megsy wanted another mouthpiece other than Omid, Katie Nicholl would be great for the role - she has been around for ages, she is ever so nice and she always finds something positive to say (and she sounds decently British).
If Megsy is using Katie Nicholl to get some good PR out there for them, it would be hilarious because of the following:
https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/mail/2019/11/27/exclusive-mailbomb-pt-1-top-mail-journalist-katie-nicholl-used-illegally-obtained-info-in-stories
* Three phone hackers admit selling MS Nicholl stories
* Two private investigators admit supplying her with 'blagged' information
* Targets include prince Harry, Hugh Grant, and Carole Middleton
* It comes as Meghan Markle sues The Mail on Sunday for publishing her private letter, but
* The Mail on Sunday and MS Nicholl deny any wrongdoing
They call her Flipper, Flipper, feet are so Frightening,
We all agree, they’re Big & Ugleee
They call her Flipper, Flipper, teeth full of Whitening,
We can all see, it’s all about Meee...
Hahahaha Brilliant, especially
“ how she developed 12 toes “
& one on her nose?
I suppose she serves some porpoise 😉
Metoo loved Flipper the dolphin 🐬
"Just the title is a joke, Finding Freedom, have they been enslaved, was she kept as a sex slave kidnapped from her home and kept in somebody's basement. Was Harry put in care, fostered out, abused...........god they are a joke."
"Finding Harry's Balls" is more appropriate title for the book."
"Finding their integrity would be harder still."
"Finding Freedom?Like tortured political prisoners?Women in forced marriages? Victims of human trafficking?"
https://66.media.tumblr.com/fd6d910ac1406548208fb94e1f6e04e9/debbd0b8908e373a-66/s640x960/5e79eb1c4796a8bbcf397f0545b463ad9853decb.png
torontopaper
@torontopaper1
·
13h
Darling, his birthday is in 2 days. What you gonna do now? People wondering where the baby is. No custody. No money. All plans failed. Get a job peasant!
I'm really not sure what to think of this "person". rumor was it was ghosted friends of Megs outing her but, you just never know. Some of their stuff is really out there.
Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand's book Finding Freedom due out in the summer
Book is advertised as an 'honest, up-close and disarming portrait,' of the couple
Authors say they had 'unique access,' as they set out to tell the couple's story
Sussexes gave interview to the authors before move to America, MoS learned
By LUKE MAY FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 12:54 EDT, 4 May 2020 | UPDATED: 15:14 EDT, 4 May 2020
1.9k comments
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8285659/New-Harry-Meghan-book-accurate-portrayal-say-authors.html
The Harkles really do not seem to know how to read a room do they? It seems to be a real blind spot with them.
Of the many thousands of negative comments posted about them daily, there are a significant number who call them out for whinging and being ungrateful for the wealthy and privileged life they have. What that woman spent on clothing and accessories for official engagements in one year (actually I think she was a working royal for just over a year) was obscene and would house, feed and clothe 200 families very comfortably for a year. And clothes and accessories was just part of her extravagance ...